Verizon Doesn't Like The Idea Of Open Internet” – Appeals FCC Net Neutrality Decision

[czerdrill]

You're right in relying on VZW data service, but the argument that would be made is the user is forced to use VZW's tethering app. In that sense it's anti-competition to block the app.

It's possible the DOJ would say VZW either has to handle this through fees or some other service tech, rather than deny users access to the apps. Not sure how they accomplish that with rooted users flashing roms. Although VZW may be justified in simply not allowing the app to install on its handsets in the market - it is neither blocking the app from a search nor the user from getting the app elsewhere. Not sure which direction the DOJ would go with that, but I hoipe they side with VZW because I don't want to have to subsidize people abusing it for a home ISP, especially since with LTE they can get that service for $30 a month (which is extremely competitive with broadband providers).

Ah yes, ok I understand the other side of the arguments now

 

[SquireSCA]

Probably a gray area. Although I'd agree that's their motivation, along with the coming future of VoLTE - eventually all voice will be over data, I think, at least for mobile.

In some ways, it's a gray area for consumer benefit, too. They pay a lot of money for spectrum and the infrastructure. If people start "gaming" the system with tethering apps and things like GV or GTalk, then VZW has no choice but to raise the price for ALL customers. I don't need or want to use my mobile data as a home ISP, so it's good that VZW charges them rather than raising the price $5 for everyone.

Cafe-style pricing is nothing new nor unique to mobile voice/data. It's an important aspect of people paying for what they use.

Tethering in and of itself is not "gaming" the system, unless as a result you use too much bandwidth.

Bandwidth, and the excessive consumption of it, is what stresses and clogs a network, not tethering itself. If someone tethers and uses 1.5gb a month, there is no difference whatsoever to the network than a non-tetherer using 1.5gb a month. None.

The problem is two-fold, from Verizon's perspective:

1) The person that tethers their PS3 to their phone and chews up 15gb a month. That person is eating up bandwidth and clogging up the system.
2) The rest that tether, VZW wants $20 a month for, regardless of how much data they use. You might pay a total phone bill of $130 a month for an unlimited plan, as I do, and use an average of 300mb per month because most of the time you are on WiFi and not even using their network, but if you want to send one 5mb email from your laptop, they want $20 a month for it.

So VZW has a real problem with tethering, and a perceived one. One has a small number of people really chewing up bandwidth. The other is just greed. They could solve the bandwidth issue by throttling anyone using too much data, as they SHOULD do, whether the person is tethered or not.

 

[SquireSCA]

If this law kills their ability to block tethering, and it should, then it will simply force VZW to just bundle it in with your data plan and increase the cost, forcing you to buy tethering whether you want it or not. This is exactly what they are doing with texting.

Sending texts is extremely cheap for VZW. It uses almost no bandwidth, and texting plans have the highest profit margins out of any service that VZW offers, bar none. They are almost literally printing themselves money on these plans, the markup is incredible and it is almost all profit.

But because there are a lot of apps that let you IM from your phone, people are switching to those and dropping text plans. So VZW's response? They plan to start making texting part of your data plan, requiring it basically, and charging you for it. That way, even if you don't use it, you are still paying for it and VZW's investors can stay happy and go buy another Lexus or something...

I love Capitalism, it has made this country great, but there is something about cell phone carriers that rubs me the wrong way. Maybe they are just a little too cut-throat for my tastes, I don't know...

 

[czerdrill]

If this law kills their ability to block tethering, and it should, then it will simply force VZW to just bundle it in with your data plan and increase the cost, forcing you to buy tethering whether you want it or not. This is exactly what they are doing with texting.

Sending texts is extremely cheap for VZW. It uses almost no bandwidth, and texting plans have the highest profit margins out of any service that VZW offers, bar none. They are almost literally printing themselves money on these plans, the markup is incredible and it is almost all profit.

But because there are a lot of apps that let you IM from your phone, people are switching to those and dropping text plans. So VZW's response? They plan to start making texting part of your data plan, requiring it basically, and charging you for it. That way, even if you don't use it, you are still paying for it and VZW's investors can stay happy and go buy another Lexus or something...

I love Capitalism, it has made this country great, but there is something about cell phone carriers that rubs me the wrong way. Maybe they are just a little too cut-throat for my tastes, I don't know...

I've gotta ask... What company do you know of that doesn't do things like this?

 

[FunN4Lo]

Please please, do not do the Federal agencies fighting! There is a lot more to this "open internet" bill than its devious name. This is a HUGE power grab! Think about it, can the internet actually be free under the regulation of the government? NO! Do not fall for the traps to convince you that this bill is good, they put in a few babies so when Verizon disagrees, you and the government will run propaganda on on thrash. We will be all losers under this bill. In its essence, this bill will give power to the FCC to regulate it, this power it never had, sure they promise openness, but guess what is next after that. Please read the damn bill before voting on it!

The unintended consequences from government intervention like this is ALWAYS worse than the ill they proffess to correct.

 

[kodiak799]

I love Capitalism, it has made this country great, but there is something about cell phone carriers that rubs me the wrong way. Maybe they are just a little too cut-throat for my tastes, I don't know...

Really no better example of lack of competition in the carrier business. How $15 texting plans even got started is beyond me. What?!? You want to charge $15 for texting...no one is going to pay that.

Funny thing is, texting over cell isn't even all that reliable in the sense that if your phone dies or temporarily out of service, you won't get the text. Maybe GV will drop some, I don't know, but it always goes to my gmail and is received whether my phone is turned on or not.

 

[SquireSCA]

I've gotta ask... What company do you know of that doesn't do things like this?

And I've gotta ask, why do you always seem to support it? I mean, there is one thing to accept the fact that all companies are greedy and will screw you any chance that they can, but it does seem odd to actually welcome, embrace and defend that.

Yes, most companies are always looking for ways to improve profits. They have to. Some just seem to be more "sharks" than others, that's all. I think that charging twice for the same data, when combined you are way under the amount of data that they sold you, is wrong. It's an opinion, we don't have to agree on that, we have gone over this many times and you know how I feel about it. To me, 5gb is 5gb. If I am using less than 1gb and a small percentage of that was tethered from my laptop, I don't want to be hassled about it, and with me running on a custom ROM that has free tethering working on it, I don't have to be. I refuse to pay for the same data twice. And it sounds like the lawsuit *may* address that.

The OS comes with tethering, it was designed to be part of it. VZW takes that out, essentially restricting the OS, and then adding back what it was supposed to have, for a monthly fee. They actively try to block using these other apps that provide a service that VZW wants to charge you for, so in that sense this law makes sense. VZW will try to work their way out of it any way they can and I am sure they have a battallion of lawyers and lobbyists working feverishly around the clock on it, but the end result is that the OS itself and the market apps provide something for free, and VZW blocks them because they want to charge you for something that was supposed to be included.

From what I understand, that is the crux of the issue, but I am not a lawyer so I could be wrong. I think that the reason I get annoyed with VZW, is that they are not really honest with their arguments. Tethering is not about bandwidth. I am sure that there are a few people hogging stupid amounts of bandwidth, and VZW has the technology to simply throttle them or even stop their service at any threshhold that they decide. They don't have to do anything but have a program flip a switch and those people are stopped in their tracks.

They want to charge you for something twice, something that doesn't cost them any money. If a person tethers and stays well under their plans limit, VZW didn't need any more bandwidth or infrastructure to provide that to you. They didn't have to change anything. You are using your existing hardware, on the same network, everything... Tethering plans for people that don't abuse it, are alnost entirely profit, because they already charged you for an unlimited or teired plan, and so long as your total data is within those limits, its no skin off their nose. They just charged you twice for the same amount of data, just because you wanted to use some of the data you already paid for on a second device.

If they were honest about it and just admitted that they are double-dipping, I would have a little more respect for them. But when they try to justify what they are doing by making misleading arguments, that is what rubs me the wrong way. I know why they are doing it, I understand why they would want to, so why not just be honest about it?

Because admitting that you are essentially overcharging or double-charging your customers is not a good marketing campaign I guess...

 

[Tuktanuk]

and i've gotta ask, why do you always seem to support it? I mean, there is one thing to accept the fact that all companies are greedy and will screw you any chance that they can, but it does seem odd to actually welcome, embrace and defend that.

Yes, most companies are always looking for ways to improve profits. They have to. Some just seem to be more "sharks" than others, that's all. I think that charging twice for the same data, when combined you are way under the amount of data that they sold you, is wrong. It's an opinion, we don't have to agree on that, we have gone over this many times and you know how i feel about it. To me, 5gb is 5gb. If i am using less than 1gb and a small percentage of that was tethered from my laptop, i don't want to be hassled about it, and with me running on a custom rom that has free tethering working on it, i don't have to be. I refuse to pay for the same data twice. And it sounds like the lawsuit *may* address that.

The os comes with tethering, it was designed to be part of it. Vzw takes that out, essentially restricting the os, and then adding back what it was supposed to have, for a monthly fee. They actively try to block using these other apps that provide a service that vzw wants to charge you for, so in that sense this law makes sense. Vzw will try to work their way out of it any way they can and i am sure they have a battallion of lawyers and lobbyists working feverishly around the clock on it, but the end result is that the os itself and the market apps provide something for free, and vzw blocks them because they want to charge you for something that was supposed to be included.

From what i understand, that is the crux of the issue, but i am not a lawyer so i could be wrong. I think that the reason i get annoyed with vzw, is that they are not really honest with their arguments. Tethering is not about bandwidth. I am sure that there are a few people hogging stupid amounts of bandwidth, and vzw has the technology to simply throttle them or even stop their service at any threshhold that they decide. They don't have to do anything but have a program flip a switch and those people are stopped in their tracks.

They want to charge you for something twice, something that doesn't cost them any money. If a person tethers and stays well under their plans limit, vzw didn't need any more bandwidth or infrastructure to provide that to you. They didn't have to change anything. You are using your existing hardware, on the same network, everything... Tethering plans for people that don't abuse it, are alnost entirely profit, because they already charged you for an unlimited or teired plan, and so long as your total data is within those limits, its no skin off their nose. They just charged you twice for the same amount of data, just because you wanted to use some of the data you already paid for on a second device.

If they were honest about it and just admitted that they are double-dipping, i would have a little more respect for them. But when they try to justify what they are doing by making misleading arguments, that is what rubs me the wrong way. I know why they are doing it, i understand why they would want to, so why not just be honest about it?

Because admitting that you are essentially overcharging or double-charging your customers is not a good marketing campaign i guess...

qftft!

 

[czerdrill]

And I've gotta ask, why do you always seem to support it? I mean, there is one thing to accept the fact that all companies are greedy and will screw you any chance that they can, but it does seem odd to actually welcome, embrace and defend that.

It has zero to do with me supporting it and everything to do with the economic system that exists in this country. Like I said before, unless you're expecting some complete overhaul of capitalism or the introduction of socialism to this country, the things that you think are "right" and "fair" are never going to happen. The problem is when someone agrees with the economic system that is in place, the few people here who have no concept of it are quick to label them as "you must work for verizon". Its silliness in every sense of the word. VZW is not doing anything illegal, they're chasing a profit, and charging for a product/service for which people are willing to pay. The funny thing is that's almost the exact definition of capitalism. If you don't like capitalism, that's not VZW's fault, is it?

Yes, most companies are always looking for ways to improve profits. They have to. Some just seem to be more "sharks" than others, that's all. I think that charging twice for the same data, when combined you are way under the amount of data that they sold you, is wrong. It's an opinion, we don't have to agree on that, we have gone over this many times and you know how I feel about it. To me, 5gb is 5gb. If I am using less than 1gb and a small percentage of that was tethered from my laptop, I don't want to be hassled about it, and with me running on a custom ROM that has free tethering working on it, I don't have to be. I refuse to pay for the same data twice. And it sounds like the lawsuit *may* address that.

Of course some companies are going to be more sharks then others. Again, that's just how the system works. Think about it. If everyone refused to pay for tethering, do you suppose that Verizon wouldn't acquiesce or pursue some other method of making money? They charge for it because there are enough people to pay for it...again...capitalism.

The OS comes with tethering, it was designed to be part of it. VZW takes that out, essentially restricting the OS, and then adding back what it was supposed to have, for a monthly fee. They actively try to block using these other apps that provide a service that VZW wants to charge you for, so in that sense this law makes sense. VZW will try to work their way out of it any way they can and I am sure they have a battallion of lawyers and lobbyists working feverishly around the clock on it, but the end result is that the OS itself and the market apps provide something for free, and VZW blocks them because they want to charge you for something that was supposed to be included.

It's not as cut and dry as you want to make it sound. Yes the OS comes with tethering natively. Yes VZW removes it and charges for it. That's not up for debate. However, the native tethering that is built into the OS depends on a pre-existing network connection. It doesn't just operate on its own, so it's not like you could tether without having a data plan. I know people like you don't like admitting it, but the contract you signed is a valid contract, until someone finds it invalid. So yes, it might be unfair and unethical and so messed up to you, but you agreed to the contract when you signed it. That doesn't mean the contract is airtight and there is nothing wrong with it, but when you sign something both parties are expected to know the terms of what they signed. Pleading ignorance is never an excuse, no matter how unfair you think something is. Again, it seems you are after something far more broad then just carrier reform. You seem to want to change all laws so that they benefit you. It simply doesn't, and won't work like that. You were not forced to sign the contract, you are not forced to stay with them if you disagree with the contract because you were clueless about what you were agreeing to, and VZW can't force you to stay with them if you want to leave. I think VZW will have a far easier time arguing that point, then you would saying "I want to be able to extend my mobile phones data plan to all my devices so that I have mobile data for every internet capable device I own at anytime, anywhere for $30/month even though this here contract with my signature on it says I won't do that"...

From what I understand, that is the crux of the issue, but I am not a lawyer so I could be wrong. I think that the reason I get annoyed with VZW, is that they are not really honest with their arguments. Tethering is not about bandwidth. I am sure that there are a few people hogging stupid amounts of bandwidth, and VZW has the technology to simply throttle them or even stop their service at any threshhold that they decide. They don't have to do anything but have a program flip a switch and those people are stopped in their tracks.

I keep hearing this and my question is an honest one. Where did VZW say that the reason they're throttling or whatever is because tether-ers are using up all their bandwidth? People keep reciting this as if its fact, but did VZW actually say that? Have a link to prove they said that? Or is this just more forum fodder for people to talk about the evil conglomerate that is VZW, like they were talking about Apple photoshopping pictures? I've never read anything official from VZW that says "tether-ers are using up all our bandwidth so we will be throttling"...if you have please provide where it was said?

They want to charge you for something twice, something that doesn't cost them any money. If a person tethers and stays well under their plans limit, VZW didn't need any more bandwidth or infrastructure to provide that to you. They didn't have to change anything. You are using your existing hardware, on the same network, everything... Tethering plans for people that don't abuse it, are alnost entirely profit, because they already charged you for an unlimited or teired plan, and so long as your total data is within those limits, its no skin off their nose. They just charged you twice for the same amount of data, just because you wanted to use some of the data you already paid for on a second device.

You paid for data for one device. Again...you can argue how fair it is, but that's irrelevant. Its in the contract you signed. Period. There's no point in whining about it here. Take it to the higher ups if you truly feel this way.

If they were honest about it and just admitted that they are double-dipping, I would have a little more respect for them. But when they try to justify what they are doing by making misleading arguments, that is what rubs me the wrong way. I know why they are doing it, I understand why they would want to, so why not just be honest about it?

I'm sorry but this is BS. You're telling me if VZW said "we are double dipping, guys, and will be charging you twice for the same data" you'd say "Oh those honest folks at VZW! Love them!!"...gimme a break. Every company does this, some more then others. I guess I just don't get why you are so surprised or shocked by it. And like I said, show me a company that doesn't do it. It's capitalism, bud. No more no less.

Because admitting that you are essentially overcharging or double-charging your customers is not a good marketing campaign I guess...

First off the "overcharging" argument is ridiculous. What determines that they "overcharged"? Is there a standard that is followed when setting prices for your product? VZW's prices compared to what they offer are very competitive with every other carrier out there. So if VZW is overcharging so is everyone else. The truth is, and you won't admit it, is you simply don't like what they're charging because you think it's too high. That's it.

Second, the double-charging is a gray area, but again, regardless you signed a contract, and you agreed to it. It makes you look far more foolish then VZW, believe me. You gave an example to me in another thread about "if you signed a contract that said I can hit you in the face twice a day, would that be fair"...I hope you can appreciate that I'd be an utter moron to sign such a contract. People need to take responsibility for what they do, rather then try to deflect blame to someone else.

The funny thing is the freedom to deflect that blame, is another right afforded by the country we live in. haha...the same country whose economic system you seem to have a problem with. You can't have it both ways, man.

 

[SquireSCA]

I accept greed, and I don't be greed in and of itself to be bad. It is a motivator, nothing more.

However, if a company, or person, cannot be honest about their intentions, then it says to me that they question themselves. If I believe in something that is important to me, I am proud to tell you WHY, because I will stand by it.

We have heard the argument from VZW and others, how "this is why we are cracking down on tethering"... It was about people using tethering to abuse bandwidth. And that is a valid argument. But is the issue tethering, or abusing bandwidth?

Abusing bandwidth costs resources, it degrades performance, it can impact other paying customers, etc... But does the vehicle that the person used to abuse the bandwidth really matter? No. Using 25gb a month is using 25gb a month, and if VZW wants to "protect their network and services" all they have to do is throttle that account, or terminate it. They already have the mechanism to stop the bandwidth hogs whenever they want and it really doesn't cost them anything to do so.

So on one hand, they have a valid concern that they are rightfully wanting to attack and control. My problem is that they use that valid argument, to try and justify why they double-charge people for tethering, as if one has anything to do with the other. They don't.

People that burn up too much bandwidth are the problem. They manner in which they do it, isn't really important. It's like saying that if I rob a bank, it makes a difference if my get-away vehicle is a car or a pickup truck. It really doesn't matter how I drove off with the loot, it is the fact that I stole the loot that matters.

So charging everyone else who has that pickup truck but who doesn't rob banks, just doesn't seem justified to me. Go after the people stealing too much bandwidth and clogging up the system, I am all for that.

But to try and use that tio justify charging people twice when they actually use *less* data than they *paid for* seems crappy to me. And apparently enough people seem to feel the same way that the Feds passed down a ruling that may squash this issue.

 

[OneTenderRebel]

Look what Al Gore got us all in to (not a political reference, a "I created the internet" reference)

 

[czerdrill]

I accept greed, and I don't be greed in and of itself to be bad. It is a motivator, nothing more.

However, if a company, or person, cannot be honest about their intentions, then it says to me that they question themselves. If I believe in something that is important to me, I am proud to tell you WHY, because I will stand by it.

We have heard the argument from VZW and others, how "this is why we are cracking down on tethering"... It was about people using tethering to abuse bandwidth. And that is a valid argument. But is the issue tethering, or abusing bandwidth?

Abusing bandwidth costs resources, it degrades performance, it can impact other paying customers, etc... But does the vehicle that the person used to abuse the bandwidth really matter? No. Using 25gb a month is using 25gb a month, and if VZW wants to "protect their network and services" all they have to do is throttle that account, or terminate it. They already have the mechanism to stop the bandwidth hogs whenever they want and it really doesn't cost them anything to do so.

So on one hand, they have a valid concern that they are rightfully wanting to attack and control. My problem is that they use that valid argument, to try and justify why they double-charge people for tethering, as if one has anything to do with the other. They don't.

People that burn up too much bandwidth are the problem. They manner in which they do it, isn't really important. It's like saying that if I rob a bank, it makes a difference if my get-away vehicle is a car or a pickup truck. It really doesn't matter how I drove off with the loot, it is the fact that I stole the loot that matters.

So charging everyone else who has that pickup truck but who doesn't rob banks, just doesn't seem justified to me. Go after the people stealing too much bandwidth and clogging up the system, I am all for that.

But to try and use that tio justify charging people twice when they actually use *less* data than they *paid for* seems crappy to me. And apparently enough people seem to feel the same way that the Feds passed down a ruling that may squash this issue.

No we haven't heard the argument from VZW. Like I said, they never said we are throttling because tether-ers are using up all our bandwidth. People like to argue that because it makes VZW seem like some evil company who's double billing people, but they never said that. So no, "we" haven't heard the argument from VZW. They're doing exactly what you're proposing they do, which is go after the people who are in the top 5%. Yes, the possibility exists that those top 5% might be 90% tether-ers but that doesn't mean anything because like you said a bandwidth hog is bandwidth hog regardless of how they're doing it. Of course, you can prove me wrong by showing me where VZW said they are throttling because tether-ers are using up all their bandwidth. You won't find it, because they never said it.

Secondly, like I said the double billing crap is irrelevant. You agreed to it. Plain and simple. I dont know where you got the idea that this ruling "may squash this issue" because thats not how it reads to me. If anything (and to me it sounds like a stretch), the most that'll happen is VZW will be forced to unblock the tethering apps. They'll still charge for tethering though, and they'll still throttle. So this "ruling" which you seem to have misunderstood will not effect Verizon's bottom line in anyway. The part that you seem to forget is that the tethering apps rely on Verizon's network. The Feds are not going to tell Verizon that they have to let some basement developer have unlimited access to piggyback off their towers and network and undercut them on their own network. Not sure why you would even think that's a remote possibility.

 

[SquireSCA]

The Feds are not going to tell Verizon that they have to let some basement developer have unlimited access to piggyback off their towers and network and undercut them on their own network.

Ummm.... Doesn't almost any app do just that?

I mean, there are IM clients that piggy back on your data plan and allow you to text and use SMS services which bypass their texting plan and services?

Are there not apps like Skype out there, that would allow someone to sign up for a data plan but choose the cheapest minute plan, and then use the data plan to make unlimited phone voice calls to anywhere in the world? Something that VZW would charge a lot more money for if someone wanted unlimited calling and an international plan?

What about apps that let you stream video, like YouTube, Netflix and Hulu, while VZW has their own VCast streaming services that they charge for?

The problem with your argument is that what you propose shouldn't or won't happen, already has in many areas. It just hasn't happened to this one area yet; Tethering.

There are plenty of apps out there that provide free services that let you bypass the ones that VZW offers and charges for, and they can all require using or "piggybacking" on VZW's data plan and network in order to function.

 

[ABQNM]

I find it amazing how much drama can be stirred up with a misplaced picture. This was NOT Verizon WIRELESS. This is Verizon Communications. They are the landline telephone and Internet company, not your cell phone provider. They are completely separate in their operations. Before going off, please read and fully understand the article.

That said, I full disagree with their position.

With regard to wireless, as much as I wish tethering was included in the data plans, I completely understand why they make a fuss. Most smartphone data users will use far less than 5gb per month, often closer to a few hundred mb. The tethering users tend to use well over 5gb, even up to the hundreds. That is a lot of data bandwidth that could be used by those who pay for what they are getting and not trying to cheat the system. If you want to tether more than just occasionally, pay for the plan.

Sent from my brain using human to phone transport technology.

 

[SquireSCA]

I find it amazing how much drama can be stirred up with a misplaced picture. This was NOT Verizon WIRELESS. This is Verizon Communications. They are the landline telephone and Internet company, not your cell phone provider. They are completely separate in their operations. Before going off, please read and fully understand the article.

That said, I full disagree with their position.

With regard to wireless, as much as I wish tethering was included in the data plans, I completely understand why they make a fuss. Most smartphone data users will use far less than 5gb per month, often closer to a few hundred mb. The tethering users tend to use well over 5gb, even up to the hundreds. That is a lot of data bandwidth that could be used by those who pay for what they are getting and not trying to cheat the system. If you want to tether more than just occasionally, pay for the plan.

Sent from my brain using human to phone transport technology.

Understood, but they could still have data caps on the tethering under the current data plan.

It's all moot for me anyway I guess. When I occasionally need to tether for some reason, I will and I am not paying for it and there is not much they can do about it. When you use less than 1GB a month on an Unlimited plan, it isn't like my account is going to pop up in that top 5% bracket and cause them to question my usage...